This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

In the mid 1990s, most of the movie production houses
that were publishing or developing games made a semi-graceful exit
from the industry. Buena Vista, as Disney's game publishing arm,
was one of the few that stuck around. Now in its eleventh year,
the company has made another shift, changing the name to Buena Vista
Games, and changing the focus to the more core gamer. With the power
of Disney behind them, and the acquisition of a few key individuals
from established development houses, Buena Vista Games hopes to
be a major industry player in both the short and long term. Senior
vice president and general manager Graham Hopper spoke to Game
Developer about Buena Vista's new initiatives in the core-gamer
space.

Brandon Sheffield: How has Buena Vista evolved
over the years, and what has prompted this renewed interest in the
console gaming space?

Graham Hopper: Our business started about 10 years ago;
in fact it was 10 years ago [as of December 2004] that Disney Interactive
was formed, and it was predominantly a PC publisher for a long period
of time. We did achieve a great deal of success on the PC platform,
right throughout the 1990s. However, we have not been known as a
significant console developer; we tended to license all that out,
so we had sort of a dual model where we published certain things
ourselves, mainly on the PC, and we licensed out the rest. Of course
what we realized is that as the console market has become bigger
and more valuable, there was a real opportunity for us to expand
our business by starting to publish on console as well. So that
was stage one of the evolution of our business, which went into
motion in 2002 and 2003.

Nightmare Before Christmas

We started looking at different genres of products, as opposed
to just the traditional Disney branded products. So for example,
we worked with Monolith Studios on Tron 2.0, and we also
started work with Capcom on developing a, shall we say, sequel to
Tim Burton's Nightmare Before Christmas. And again, we've
started thinking about developing original properties. I think what
we realized pretty quickly is that as powerful a brand as Disney
Interactive is, it does of course limit what we're able to do in
the gaming space. And the key evolution for us was realizing that
the game business has changed from something that kids did, which
would be true of 10 years ago, to something that is now an entertainment
medium which everybody enjoys. You come home from work, and you
can decide what you want to do to entertain yourself, you can switch
on the TV and watch ABC, owned by Disney - yes, please watch it
(laughs)-or you can play a game, and it makes sense for us to be
able to offer entertainment that crosses whatever different choices
[consumers] want to make.

So we changed the name of the company to Buena Vista Games, or
BVG. Underneath that, we have two labels. Label one is Disney Interactive,
which used to be the company name but now is just a label of ours,
in which we do all Disney-branded product. I don't like to call
that kids products, because the Disney products appeal to a very
broad audience, like for example Kingdom Hearts. Our second
label, our newer label, is Buena Vista Interactive. And Buena Vista
Interactive is, much like we use Touchstone and Miramax within the
company to distinguish between Disney-branded products and non-Disney-branded
products [for movies], Buena Vista Interactive allows us to do the
same thing.

One of the things we've been quite involved in over the years was
developing the games themselves. However, we often handed them off
to third parties to publish. So we had deals with the likes of Sony,
who publishes games, but in many cases we were the ones who secured
the developers, worked to develop the game, then handed a finished
product over to a publisher. And we realized that our capabilities
in publishing could easily expand to cover the console products.
Disney as a company is a top-ten vendor at Wal-Mart, for example.
And so those retail skills that we have give us a size and heft
in the marketplace that is much larger than our actual size, and
much larger than any other company in the game space, that's for
sure.

BS: Publishing aside, will you be incorporating
development as well?

GH: Yes, one of the things we did is we repositioned the
business. Just to give you a sense of the extent of the changeover
- PC was a large portion of our business, close to 60 percent three
years ago. And today throughout North America it's about 10 percent
of our business. Before, we'd been invested in PC development studios.
So what we did was spin those studios off, but we will get back
into development; ownership of development studios and development
capacities will support our console strategy going forward.

BS: Will you be making developer or publisher acquisitions
to that end?

GH: Yes, to the extent that they make financial sense.

BS: So what will happen to those developers that previously
worked on your licensed titles?

Graham Hopper

GH: We plan to continue operating as a license business
in addition to our publishing capacity. In other words, we have
an open mind about how to approach publishing a game. If the right
way to develop a game happens to be to secure the unique expertise
of a particular company that requires us to take a licensed approach,
we'll want to do that. I think Kingdom Hearts is a great
example of that, where they have brought the Final Fantasy
characters together with ours. So there will be a licensing component
to what we do. We have licensing arrangements with THQ which run
forward into the future, and those will continue as they are. But
I think you can expect that with properties like Chicken Little
which come out of feature animation, we'll be more likely to publish
those ourselves than we would be to automatically license them out
like we would have before.

BS: What do you think about other film companies, such
as Warner Brothers, getting back into game development?

GH: I think they see the same strategic value in the business
that we do - but I think the difference is that different companies
have different starting points. So the fact is that we've stayed
around for 10 years, and we have a profitable business, and we have
the right kind of talent, having brought people on board like Mike
Ryder who used to head up Sierra, people like Ed Bainbridge out
of Eidos. We view our investment in talent out of the gaming industry
as being the critical differentiator between us and other companies.
The big lesson that we learned in that mid-'90s period where everyone
got out of the business is that this is not the film business. We
understand the differences. There are significant convergences,
but we understand the difference in that we are trying to build
a gaming company, not a company that does a bit of games on the
side.

BS: How are you different from other companies, then?

GH:
Well let's think about what this means for the development
community-thing is, as we enter the core gaming space, we have pretty
much a blank sheet of paper. And one of the problems that developers
have is getting publishers to pay attention to new intellectual
property ideas. In many cases that's because the publisher may already
have a number of driving games or shooters, and then when somebody
comes up with a new twist on these. As a publisher you have to say "is
this cannibalistic, or is this something that I should be publishing as
well?" We as an organization have very few of those sorts of potential
conflicts. And we're actively looking for new intellectual properties
to develop. Disney's very renowned as a marketing company-also renowned
for developing and managing franchises. I mean we've built some of the
biggest franchises in the world, I think out of the top five, three of
them are owned by Disney. And these are things that we've either
nurtured over the years, or simply developed in a relatively short
period of time. Our ownership of media, like television channels and so
on, allows us to evolve and grow franchises in a unique way. We're
essentially throwing open the doors to the development community to
come to us with great ideas.